Genco Shipping & Trading Limited
Genco Unli limited
On a course for success
October 2017
Genco Shipping & Trading Limited Genco Unli limited On a course - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Genco Shipping & Trading Limited Genco Unli limited On a course for success October 2017 Forward Looking Statements "Safe Harbor" Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 This presentation contains
On a course for success
October 2017
2
"Safe Harbor" Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
This presentation contains forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements use words such as “anticipate,” “budget,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with a discussion of potential future events, circumstances or future operating or financial performance. These forward looking statements are based on management’s current expectations and observations. Included among the factors that, in our view, could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward looking statements contained in this report are the following: (i) further declines or sustained weakness in demand in the drybulk shipping industry; (ii) continuation of weakness or further declines in drybulk shipping rates; (iii) changes in the supply of or demand for drybulk products, generally or in particular regions; (iv) changes in the supply of drybulk carriers including newbuilding of vessels or lower than anticipated scrapping of older vessels; (v) changes in rules and regulations applicable to the cargo industry, including, without limitation, legislation adopted by international organizations or by individual countries and actions taken by regulatory authorities; (vi) increases in costs and expenses including but not limited to: crew wages, insurance, provisions, lube, oil, bunkers, repairs, maintenance and general, administrative, and management fee expenses; (vii) whether our insurance arrangements are adequate; (viii) changes in general domestic and international political conditions; (ix) acts of war, terrorism, or piracy; (x) changes in the condition of the Company’s vessels or applicable maintenance or regulatory standards (which may affect, among other things,
disposition of vessels; (xii) the amount of offhire time needed to complete repairs on vessels and the timing and amount of any reimbursement by our insurance carriers for insurance claims, including offhire days; (xiii) the completion of definitive documentation with respect to charters; (xiv) charterers’ compliance with the terms of their charters in the current market environment; (xv) the extent to which our operating results continue to be affected by weakness in market conditions and charter rates; (xvi) our ability to maintain contracts that are critical to our
and employees; and other factors listed from time to time in our public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission including, without limitation, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 and its subsequent reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K. Our ability to pay dividends in any period will depend upon various factors, including the limitations under any credit agreements to which we may be a party, applicable provisions of Marshall Islands law and the final determination by the Board of Directors each quarter after its review of our financial performance. The timing and amount of dividends, if any, could also be affected by factors affecting cash flows, results
any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
3
4
5
―
Largest US based drybulk ship owner Drybulk company focused on major and minor bulk commodities Headquartered in the US
―
Well positioned for a recovering market Well capitalized balance sheet with attractive debt facilities Spot exposure to improving freight rate environment
―
Concentration on full in-house commercial platform Incorporating voyage charters and direct cargo liftings Providing logistics solution to major cargo owners
―
Exploring growth and consolidation opportunities from a position of strength
―
Continue to be leading low cost operator Achieved considerable vessel operating savings since 2014
―
Founded in December 2004 (NYSE:GNK) Full service operating platform with a diverse fleet of 60 vessels
Genco is in a position of strength to become a bellwether
6
Strengthen Balance Sheet Expense Optimization Implement Operating Commercial Platform Take Advantage of Growth Opportunities
▪
Execution of strategic initiatives has enhanced Genco’s already industry leading drybulk platform
▪
Transformed commercial platform to an active
increase margins and
▪
Next phase in the Company’s strategy is to look to acquire high quality, modern tonnage with a focus on Capesize and Ultramax vessels
7
Genco has significantly improved its leading market position focusing on enhancing its commercial strategy and leading low-cost operations
Improved margins through executed commercial initiatives combined with cost savings measures
$4,907 $6,498 $8,439 $4,514 $4,395 $4,333
$3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 FY 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017
Genco TCE vs. DVOE TCE DVOE
Genco Shipping & Trading Limited Strong Balance Sheet & Straightforward Capital Structure Strong Liquidity Position $181 Million at Jun 30 Large Scale Fleet Covering Major and Minor Bulks Transparent Operations Continuous Cost Savings Since 2014 Strategic Chartering Focus Growth Potential No Newbuilding Capex Obligations
8
Genco’s Fleet Strongly Aligns With Global Trade Dynamics
Source: Clarksons Research Services Limited 2017
Iron Ore Coal Grain Minor Bulk 38% 10% 23% 29% 31% 16% 28% 25% Genco Cargoes Carried Global Drybulk Trade
Percentage of Trade – 2016(e)
Genco’s fleet of major and minor bulk vessels largely mirrors global trade flows, enabling the Company to capitalize on key trade routes
58% 42%
Major Bulk Fleet Minor Bulk Fleet
Commodity Genco Fleet Distribution (dwt) Primary Vessel Type
Capesize Panamax Supramax Handysize
9
Upside Earnings Potential Combined With Steadier Income Stream
Source: Marsoft Incorporated
13 6 26 15
10 15 20 25 30 Capesize Panamax Ultramax / Supramax / Handymax Handysize # of Vessels Minor Bulk 1.9 0.9 0.8 0.4
Genco’s Fleet Concentrates on the Major and Minor Bulks
Shipping Market “Beta” Provides upside potential, highly linked to the iron ore trade Steadier income stream, versatile cargo carrying capabilities Major Bulk
Capesize exposure provides upside earnings potential while minor bulk fleet provides a steadier income stream
10
(1) (1) Token fixed debt repayments of $0.1 million per quarter during 2017 and 2018. Fixed debt repayments step up to $18.6 million per quarter commencing in Q1 2021.
Covenant Overview
Minimum liquidity requirement reduced to $21.5 million through Dec 31, 2018 based on a fleet of 60 vessels
No collateral maintenance test through Jun 29, 2018 for the $400 Million Credit Facility, minimum value covenant thereafter of:
―
105% starting Jun 30, 2018, 115% from Dec 31, 2018, 135% from Dec 31, 2020
No collateral maintenance test through Dec 30, 2017 for the $33 million ABN/Sinosure Facilities, minimum value covenant thereafter of:
―
100% starting Dec 31, 2017, 105% from Jun 30, 2018, 115% from Dec 31, 2018, 135% from Dec 31, 2019
Collateral maintenance covenant of 140% for the $98 Million Credit Facility remains in place, but certain amounts can be netted against its measurement
Debt outstanding presented above is as of June 30, 2017 and is gross of unamortized deferred financing costs
Genco Shipping & Trading Limited $400 Million Credit Facility $98 Million Hayfin Facility $33 Million ABN/Sinosure Facilities 7 Capesize, 3 Panamax, 2 Ultramax, 19 Supramax, 1 Handymax, 13 Handysize Vessels 6 Capesize, 3 Panamax, 2 Supramax, 2 Handysize Vessels 2 Ultramax Vessels Debt Outstanding: $26.9m Fixed Quarterly Debt Repayments: $0.7m Debt Outstanding: $403.6m Fixed Quarterly Debt Repayments: $7.6m - commencing in Q1 2019 Debt Outstanding: $95.3m Fixed Quarterly Debt Repayments: $2.5m - commencing in Q4 2017
11
12
Active Approach to Revenue Growth
Focus on increasing margins
Concentration on full in-house commercial platform
Providing full logistics solution to major cargo owners
Genco has enhanced its commercial platform aimed at driving revenue growth
Incorporating Voyage Charters & Direct Cargo Liftings Expanding Customer Base
Repositioned a portion of the fleet to capture Atlantic premium
Identified key trading lanes by vessel
Vessel speed and consumption optimization
Diversifying customer base enabling Genco to get closer to cargo
Strong risk management practices
13
Optimizing Commercial Strategy To Capture Key Trading Lanes
Source: Braemar
Commercial Strategy
Fleet deployment mix weighted towards short-term fixtures: provides optionality in a rising freight rate environment
Fleet concentrated on the major and minor bulks
―
Capesize: provides upside potential, highly linked to the iron ore trade
―
Ultramax/Supramax/Handysize: steadier income stream, versatile cargo carrying capabilities Key Trade Routes
Iron Ore Coal Grain
14
15
Major Bulk
Vessel Name Year Built Dwt Capesize Genco Augustus 2007 180,151 Genco Tiberius 2007 175,874 Genco London 2007 177,833 Genco Titus 2007 177,729 Genco Constantine 2008 180,183 Genco Hadrian 2008 169,025 Genco Commodus 2009 169,098 Genco Maximus 2009 169,025 Genco Claudius 2010 169,001 Genco Tiger 2011 179,185 Baltic Lion 2012 179,185 Baltic Bear 2010 177,717 Baltic Wolf 2010 177,752 Panamax Genco Beauty 1999 73,941 Genco Knight 1999 73,941 Genco Vigour 1999 73,941 Genco Surprise 1998 72,495 Genco Thunder 2007 76,588 Genco Raptor 2007 76,499
13 6
Capesize Panamax
16
Major Bulk Commercial Strategy
Direct exposure to projected ton-mile demand growth highly driven by iron ore and coal
―
Positioned the fleet for a stronger 2H 2017
Diversifying and expanding the customer base
Staggering expiration dates of charters
Implementing a portfolio approach
Establishing a Singapore presence to focus on Capesize vessels as well as backhaul trades on the minor bulk fleet
1 8 3 1 1 5
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q3 2017 Q4 2017 Q1 2018 Q2 2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 Number of Vessels Minimum Expiration Capesize Panamax
▪
Majority of Capesize charters strategically positioned to expire during seasonally stronger 2H
▪
Ability to capture potential market upside heading into 2018 Major Bulk Charters Positioned for Market Recovery Major Bulk End Users
17
18
Minor Bulk
Vessel Name Year Built Dwt Vessel Name Year Built Dwt Ultramax Genco Rhone 2011 58,018 Baltic Hornet 2014 63,574 Baltic Leopard 2009 53,446 Baltic Wasp 2015 63,389 Baltic Panther 2009 53,350 Baltic Scorpion 2015 63,462 Baltic Jaguar 2009 53,473 Baltic Mantis 2015 63,470 Baltic Cougar 2009 53,432 Supramax/Handymax Genco Muse 2001 48,913 Genco Warrior 2005 55,435 Handysize Genco Hunter 2007 58,729 Genco Explorer 1999 29,952 Genco Predator 2005 55,407 Genco Progress 1999 29,952 Genco Cavalier 2007 53,617 Genco Charger 2005 28,398 Genco Aquitaine 2009 57,981 Genco Champion 2006 28,445 Genco Ardennes 2009 58,018 Genco Challenger 2003 28,428 Genco Auvergne 2009 58,020 Genco Bay 2010 34,296 Genco Bourgogne 2010 58,018 Genco Ocean 2010 34,409 Genco Brittany 2010 58,018 Genco Avra 2011 34,391 Genco Languedoc 2010 58,018 Genco Mare 2011 34,428 Genco Loire 2009 53,430 Genco Spirit 2011 34,432 Genco Lorraine 2009 53,417 Baltic Wind 2009 34,408 Genco Normandy 2007 53,596 Baltic Cove 2010 34,403 Genco Picardy 2005 55,257 Baltic Breeze 2010 34,386 Genco Provence 2004 55,317 Baltic Fox 2010 31,883 Genco Pyrenees 2010 58,018 Baltic Hare 2009 31,887
26 15
Ultramax / Supramax / Handymax Handysize
19
13% 58% 87% 42% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Nov-16 Current Atlantic vs. Pacific Exposure: Minor Bulk Fleet* Atlantic Pacific
* Includes Ultramaxes, in-house managed Supramax, and Handysize vessels.
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000
Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17
Baltic Supramax Index Routes (Atlantic vs. Pacific Routes: 2010 to Present) Atlantic Pacific
Minor Bulk Commercial Strategy
Provide full service logistics solutions to top tier cargo owners
―
Reallocated freight exposure through a more balanced Atlantic vs. Pacific split
―
Repositioned select geared vessels during the first and second quarters of 2017
―
Reduction of ballast legs and higher fleet utilization through concentrated customer geographic focus
―
Capture earnings premium offered by Atlantic market
Implementing and integrating new commercial resources
―
Added Vice President and Commercial Director, Minor Bulk Fleet
20
21
In-house operations and logistics group
―
Post-fixture logistics management of vessels
―
Enables charterers to efficiently carry cargoes
―
Monitors vessel performance to satisfy customer needs and standards
―
Promotes safety and regulatory compliance
―
Minimal incidents/detentions
We utilize two leading third-party technical managers for the day-to-day management of our fleet, including:
―
Performing routine maintenance
―
Arranging for purchasing and supplies
―
Providing access to large crew pools
―
High retention of crew
―
Benchmark across managers through KPIs and industry best practices
―
Have achieved significant savings on operating expenses to date through oversight and internal initiatives
―
Progressing towards real time data collection and management of vessel performance
In-house technical management staff actively oversees and benchmarks the performance of each manager
―
Directly handles all drydockings
―
High emphasis on cost control as well as safety and maintenance
Our current fleet contains 15 groups of sister ships
―
Several groups of sister vessels enable us to reduce costs by creating economies of scale
―
Allow for multi-vessel contracting by charterers
Selected Third-Party Technical Managers
Third-Party Technical Managers In-House Oversight In-House Drydocking Vessel Performance Tracking Benchmarking We believe this is an efficient cost structure Actively oversee third- party technical managers
Technical Management Approach Benefits from third-party managers’ economies and scalability Maintains high quality maintenance and low cost operation
22
$5,035 $4,870 $4,514 $4,364
$4,000 $4,200 $4,400 $4,600 $4,800 $5,000 $5,200
2014 2015 2016 1H 2017 DVOE
Genco’s Daily Vessel Operating Expenses
Genco has been able to consistently reduce costs since 2014 without sacrificing our high safety and maintenance standards
Additional cost saving initiatives are expected to be implemented over the course of 2017
―
Continue to implement crew optimization cost saving measures
Vast majority of Genco vessels currently have a high commercial Rightship rating of 4-stars or above
―
Provides maximum business flexibility for our cargo customers
Dedicated resources towards speed and consumption optimization
23
24
200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600
Baltic Dry Index
(BDI Points)
Source: Clarkson Research Services Limited 2017
2015 2016 2017
25
1) Source: Clarkson Research Services Limited 2017 2) Source: Commodore Research 3) Source: Public statements by subject companies
Key Iron Ore Expansion Plans(3)
20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 2017 2018 2019
MT
BHP Rio Tinto Roy Hill Anglo American Vale Significant Brazilian iron ore volume expected over the next two years
Recent Developments
Freight rates have strengthened since August primarily driven by:
―
Record steel production in China leading to heightened demand for high quality seaborne iron ore
―
Increased coal shipments to China
―
Steady growth in grain cargo flows
―
Slowing fleet growth
Baltic Dry Index crossed the 1,500 threshold at the end of September for the first time since Q1 2014
Iron ore prices have fallen to approximately $60 per ton after remaining over $70 per ton for several weeks
―
Seasonally higher seaborne volumes from Brazil and Australia in 2H could further impact the price of iron ore
Chinese iron ore imports through the first eight months
―
Chinese iron ore port stockpiles are currently 132.2MT having declined by 8% since the July peak(2)
Vale is expected to provide updated production guidance later in the year
26
1) Source: World Steel Association 2) Source: Commodore Research 3) Source: Clarkson Research Services Limited 2017
Steel Production
Chinese steel production has increased by 5.6% through August 2017 YOY(1)
―
Ex-China steel production has risen by 4.2% during the same period led by a 5.1% YOY increase in output from India
In August, China’s steel output set a record for the third consecutive month
―
Production has exceeded the 70MT threshold in each of the last six months after only occurring four times prior to 2017
―
Improved margins have incentivized greater production Iron Ore
Brazilian iron ore exports have increased by 3% in the YTD(3)
―
Aided by additional shipments from Vale’s new S11D iron ore mine Coal
China’s coal imports increased by 14% through August 2017 YOY
―
Mining accidents at Chinese domestic coal mines continue to occur which could lead to additional mine inspections and closures(2)
India’s coal power plant stockpiles have fallen to the lowest point since November 2014
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 20 40 60 80 100 120 India Stockpiles (MT) China Stockpiles (MT)
China India Coal Power Plant Stockpiles(2)
100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 MT
China India China and India Coal Imports (2010-2016)(3)
8 Mos 2017 8 Mos 2016 % Variance China 566.4 536.3 5.6% European Union 112.7 108.0 4.3% Japan 69.6 69.9
India 66.5 63.2 5.1% South Korea 47.0 45.3 3.7% Global Production 1,121.7 1,069.2 4.9% Global Steel Production (million tons)(1)
27
Source: Clarksons Research Services Limited 2017
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Wheat/Course Grain Soybean Mtpa
2016 2017F Clarksons Global Grain Trade Estimates
+5% +10%
Onset of North American grain season to commence shortly
Malaysia has extended its ban on bauxite mining through December 31, 2017
―
Increased bauxite shipments from Guinea are expected to add ton mile demand going forward
SE Asia projected to drive coal demand
―
According to Clarksons, Vietnamese coal consumption is expected to increase from 40MT in 2016 to 70MT in 2020
Chinese steel exports have declined recently due to:
―
Increased domestic demand
―
Protectionist measures taken by certain countries against inexpensive Chinese steel shipments
Exporter 2016 2017 (f) % Variance Argentina 39 37
Australia 23 35 53% Canada 25 25 1% EU 44 41
US 87 91 4% Others 128 134 4% Total 347 363 5% Exporter 2016 2017 (f) % Variance United States 58 63 10% Brazil 52 57 10% Argentina 9 11 25% Paraguay 5 5 0% Canada 4 5 5% Uruguay 1 1 4% Others 4 5 7% Total 134 147 10% Seaborne Wheat / Course Grain Trade (MT) Seaborne Soybean Trade (MT)
28
Source: Clarkson Research Services Limited 2017
Net fleet growth through the first eight months of 2017 was approximately 2.7%
―
Slippage rate to date remains high and is approximately 35%
―
Scrapping levels have eased due improved sentiment and freight rate environment
Newbuilding orders in the YTD total 125 compared to 56 during all of 2016
Approximately 9% of the fleet is greater than or equal to 20 years old on a number of vessels basis
24 Capesize vessels have been scrapped in 2017 to date including seven greater than 250,000 dwt
―
Currently 46 vessels trading in the drybulk fleet greater than 250,000 dwt with an average age
4 6 8 10 12 14
Capesize Panamax Handymax Handysize ▪
Newbuilding orderbook as a percentage of the fleet is currently 7.5%
▪
This is the lowest percentage since 2002
(mdwt)
Current Drybulk Vessel Orderbook by Type
2 4 6 8 10
Deliveries Scrapping Net Additions
Jan 2017
(mdwt)
Drybulk Vessel Deliveries vs. Scrapping
0.7%0.6%0.7%0.6% 0.1% 0.4% 1.2% 1.1% 0.7%0.7% 0.5% 0.1% 0.1%
Current
29
30
Continue to execute commercial strategy − Drive revenue growth through execution of active deployment strategy and Atlantic/Pacific exposure − Concentration on full in-house commercial platform − Incorporating voyage charters and direct cargo liftings − Providing logistics solution to major cargo owners − Major bulk: Take advantage of seasonally strong 2H and strong iron ore trade growth fundamentals − Minor bulk: Capture earnings premium of the Atlantic basin
1
Strong Liquidity Position − $181 million of cash as of June 30, 2017 Growth potential − Position of strength enables Genco to explore future growth potential − Ability to act as a consolidator of the drybulk market
Genco is in a position of strength to be a bellwether providing upside opportunity
2 3
32
Three Months Ended June 30, 2017 Three Months Ended June 30, 2016 Six Months Ended June 30, 2017 Six Months Ended June 30, 2016 INCOME STATEMENT DATA: Revenues: Voyage revenues 45,370 $ 31,460 $ 83,619 $ 51,590 $ Service revenues
Total revenues 45,370 31,874 83,619 52,815 Operating expenses: Voyage expenses 951 3,074 4,192 6,970 Vessel operating expenses 23,852 28,538 48,736 57,665 5,752 11,589 10,661 22,158 Technical management fees 1,871 2,264 3,852 4,550 Depreciation and amortization 18,185 19,686 36,358 40,025 Other operating income
Impairment of vessel assets 3,339 67,594 3,339 69,278 (Gain) loss on sale of vessels (1,343) 77 (7,712) 77 Total operating expenses 52,607 132,640 99,426 200,541 Operating loss (7,237) (100,766) (15,807) (147,726) Other (expense) income: Impairment of investment
Other expense (50) (50) (115) (174) Interest income 338 33 512 95 Interest expense (7,564) (7,013) (14,702) (14,127) Other expense (7,276) (9,726) (14,305) (16,902) Loss before reorganization items, net (14,513) (110,492) (30,112) (164,628) Reorganization items, net
Loss before income taxes (14,513) (110,557) (30,112) (164,788) Income tax expense
Net loss (14,513) $ (110,653) $ (30,112) $ (165,138) $ Net loss per share - basic (0.42) $ (15.32) $ (0.89) $ (22.87) $ Net loss per share - diluted (0.42) $ (15.32) $ (0.89) $ (22.87) $ Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic 34,430,766 7,221,735 33,965,835 7,220,265 Weighted average common shares outstanding - diluted 34,430,766 7,221,735 33,965,835 7,220,265
(Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data) (unaudited) (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data) (unaudited)
General and administrative expenses (inclusive of nonvested stock amortization expense of $1.6 million, $5.4 million, $2.3 million and $10.9 million respectively)
33
1)
EBITDA represents net (loss) income plus net interest expense, taxes and depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is included because it is used by management and certain investors as a measure of
measure in our consolidated internal financial statements, and it is presented for review at our board meetings. We believe that EBITDA is useful to investors as the shipping industry is capital intensive which often results in significant depreciation and cost of financing. EBITDA presents investors with a measure in addition to net income to evaluate our performance prior to these costs. EBITDA is not an item recognized by U.S. GAAP (i.e. non-GAAP measure) and should not be considered as an alternative to net income, operating income or any other indicator of a company’s operating performance required by U.S. GAAP. EBITDA is not a measure of liquidity or cash flows as shown in our consolidated statements of cash flows. The definition of EBITDA used here may not be comparable to that used by other companies.
N/A
June 30, 2017 December 31, 2016
(Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
BALANCE SHEET DATA: Cash (including restricted cash) 180,995 $ 169,068 $ Current assets 184,354 172,605 Total assets 1,541,719 1,568,960 Current liabilities (excluding current portion of long-term debt) 22,003 24,373 Current portion of long-term debt 9,576 4,576 Long-term debt (net of $10.2 million and $11.4 million of unamortized debt issuance 506,044 508,444 costs at June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively) Shareholders' equity 1,001,868 1,029,699 June 30, 2017 June 30, 2016 June 30, 2017 June 30, 2016 OTHER FINANCIAL DATA: Net cash used in operating activities (585) $ (41,230) $ Net cash provided by investing activities 17,022 3,697 Net cash used in financing activities (2,684) (26,879) EBITDA Reconciliation: Net loss (14,513) $ (110,653) $ (30,112) $ (165,138) $ + Net interest expense 7,226 6,980 14,190 14,032 + Income tax expense
+ Depreciation and amortization 18,185 19,686 36,358 40,025 EBITDA(1) 10,898 $ (83,891) $ 20,436 $ (110,731) $
(Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
(unaudited) (unaudited) (Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
34
(1)
Average number of vessels is the number of vessels that constituted our fleet for the relevant period, as a measured by the sum of the number of days each vessel was part of our fleet during the period divided by the number of calendar days in that period.
(2)
We define ownership days as the aggregate number of days in a period during which each vessel in our fleet has been owned by us. Ownership days are an indicator of the size of our fleet over a period and affect both the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses that we record during a period.
(3)
We define available days as the number of our ownership days less the aggregate number of days that our vessels are off-hire due to scheduled repairs or repairs under guarantee, vessel upgrades or special surveys and the aggregate amount of time that we spend positioning our vessels between time charters. Companies in the shipping industry generally use available days to measure the number of days in a period during which vessels should be capable of generating revenues.
(4)
We define operating days as the number of our available days in a period less the aggregate number of days that our vessels are off-hire due to unforeseen
revenues.
(5)
We calculate fleet utilization by dividing the number of our operating days during a period by the number of our available days during the period. The shipping industry uses fleet utilization to measure a company's efficiency in finding suitable employment for its vessels and minimizing the number of days that its vessels are off-hire for reasons other than scheduled repairs or repairs under guarantee, vessel upgrades, special surveys or vessel positioning.
(6)
We define TCE rates as our net voyage revenue (voyage revenues less voyage expenses) divided by the number of our available days during the period, which is consistent with industry standards. TCE rate is a common shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare daily earnings generated by vessels on time charters with daily earnings generated by vessels on voyage charters, because charterhire rates for vessels on voyage charters are generally not expressed in per-day amounts while charterhire rates for vessels on time charters generally are expressed in such amounts.
(7)
We define daily vessel operating expenses to include crew wages and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and maintenance (excluding drydocking), the costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Daily vessel operating expenses are calculated by dividing vessel operating expenses by ownership days for the relevant period. June 30, 2017 June 30, 2016 June 30, 2017 June 30, 2016 (unaudited) (unaudited) FLEET DATA: Total number of vessels at end of period 60 69 60 69 Average number of vessels (1) 60.5 69.5 61.7 69.8 Total ownership days for fleet (2) 5,505 6,326 11,167 12,696 Total available days for fleet (3) 5,264 6,146 10,650 12,321 Total operating days for fleet (4) 5,086 6,107 10,415 12,177 Fleet utilization (5) 96.6% 99.4% 97.8% 98.8% AVERAGE DAILY RESULTS: Time charter equivalent (6) 8,439 $ 4,618 $ 7,458 $ 3,622 $ Daily vessel operating expenses per vessel (7) 4,333 4,511 4,364 4,542 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended